These texts previously analyzed seem to be very different in principle: they come from different authors, different countries, different theorical disciplines (engineering, philosophy, literature). But when we get to analyze them, we find COMMON IDEAS:
- their main purpose is to achieve a metacoprehension of human world
- they become a challenge to common and assumed ideas from the Enlightenment, such as: the romantic idea of the author, closed and hierarchical structures, linear-based reading and writing...
- they predict many of the ideas in which the Internet and the WWW is actually based on when it was conceived by the beginnings of the 1990s.
That's why I think these texts are important. They seem to be apart in terms of history, but they are close in terms of content. They actually refer to technologies we use everyday.
- the web has a rhizomatic structure: it is very easy to get lost and to find information of any kind, but we can enjoy the multiples paths we may follow to get it. The structure may be chaotic, but: when we search for information, we can broke the rhizome at anytime, and the hyperlinks provide connection and heterogeneity to the information.
- in order to acummulate and reduce the space of Knowledge, Wikipedia might be considered the most similar type of enclyclopedia as Bush's original project (with some differences).
- we may think about the Internet and the web as Borges conceived his maze: while we surf the Web, we have to think in terms of “temporary forking” rather than “spatial movement”. The Internet is everywhere and it's nowhere at the same time.